Teleology

[Satya]

"Purpose" to me, implies a predetermined goal.

I think of it as function.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Teleology is the philosophical study of design and purpose. A teleological school of thought is one that holds all things to be designed for or directed toward a final result, that there is an inherent purpose or final cause for all that exists.
As a school of thought it can be contrasted with metaphysical naturalism, which views nature as having no design or purpose. Teleology would say that a person has eyes because he has the need of eyesight (form following function), while naturalism would say that a person has sight because he has eyes (function following form).

Most theology presupposes a teleology: design in nature can be used as a teleological argument for the existence of God.

An example of such an argument is the Watch in the Desert analogy....

"OK, so if you found a watch lying in the desert, would you assume that it "spontaneously assembled" itself from the desert sand and rocks? Of course not! You would assume that it was made, or created, by a skilled watchmaker, and dropped there by him or someone else. The watch was clearly designed for a very specific purpose, by someone with great expertise, who knew exactly what he wanted ahead of time. Therefore, when we find something as perfectly designed as a living animal, it is utterly foolish to assume that it "spontaneously assembled itself" either. It had to be designed, in all its perfection, by some Great Designer. The mere existence of well-designed watches and animals is all the proof we should need that both were created by someone with infinitely more wisdom than the creations. Both, by their existence alone, imply the existence of a great designer or creator. Watches don't "just evolve," and neither do animals (or people); ergo, evolution is logically absurd."

So what are your thoughts on Teleology?

"Purpose" is inadequate to the concept of teleology. "Order" seems to work better:

the universe appears to have order because things consistently act according to the given order. For example, ordinary matter always tends towards unity (entropy) and the four basic forces are constant.

The universe is intellegible because it is ordered. If things occured randomly, there could be no such thing as a physical law or a concept of one thing or another.

If the universe is the effect of a cause; and since effects always resemble their causes; then the cause of the universe must be intellegible -that is, something which can be understood.

 

[Satya]

"Purpose" is inadequate to the concept of teleology. "Order" seems to work better:

the universe appears to have order because things consistently act according to the given order. For example, ordinary matter always tends towards unity (entropy) and the four basic forces are constant.

The universe is intellegible because it is ordered. If things occured randomly, there could be no such thing as a physical law or a concept of one thing or another.

The order of the universe is that it moves toward disorder. Constants are only perceived and exist in varying forms outside of human perception.

If the universe is the effect of a cause; and since effects always resemble their causes; then the cause of the universe must be intellegible -that is, something which can be understood.

This statement is a begging the question fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

 

[Flavus Aquila]

The order of the universe is that it moves toward disorder. Constants are only perceived and exist in varying forms outside of human perception.

If what you are claiming is true, eventually it will be impossible to predict what will happen in terms of cause and effect.

For example (if the universe does approach disorder): when you take a step forward, there will be no reason to expect/predict that you will actually move in any given direction.

The order of the universe is not measured by WHERE everything is laid out, but by the WAY everything is laid out/works/functions.

 

[Satya]

If what you are claiming is true, eventually it will be impossible to predict what will happen in terms of cause and effect.

This is true. The smaller you go, the more random events are, and the more defined by human perception they become. Scientists expect the same holds true the larger you go.

For example (if the universe does approach disorder): when you take a step forward, there will be no reason to expect/predict that you will actually move in any given direction.

This statement doesn't hold any relevance. Please clarify.

The order of the universe is not measured by WHERE everything is laid out, but by the WAY everything is laid out/works/functions.

The universe is measured by human perception. When it comes to distance, an inch is a human defined perception of distance. Man is the measure of all things.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Oh, so what you are saying is that the Universe isn't fundamentally changing, only our perception of it is.

 

[Satya]

Oh, so what you are saying is that the Universe isn't fundamentally changing, only our perception of it is.

I'm saying that "change" is a human perception.